I am running rspec tests on a catalog object from within a Ruby app, using Rspec::Core::Runner::run:
File.open('/tmp/catalog', 'w') do |out|
YAML.dump(catalog, out)
end
...
unless RSpec::Core::Runner::run(spec_dirs, $stderr, out) == 0
raise Puppet::Error, "Unit tests failed:\n#{out.string}"
end
(The full code can be found at https://github.com/camptocamp/puppet-spec/blob/master/lib/puppet/indirector/catalog/rest_spec.rb)
In order to pass the object I want to test, I dump it as YAML to a file (currently /tmp/catalog) and load it as subject in my tests:
describe 'notrun' do
subject { YAML.load_file('/tmp/catalog') }
it { should contain_package('ppet') }
end
Is there a way I could pass the catalog object as subject to my tests without dumping it to a file?
I am not very clear as to what exactly you are trying to achieve but from my understanding I feel that using a before(:each) hook might be of use to you. You can define variables in this block that are available to all the stories in that scope.
Here is an example:
require "rspec/expectations"
class Thing
def widgets
#widgets ||= []
end
end
describe Thing do
before(:each) do
#thing = Thing.new
end
describe "initialized in before(:each)" do
it "has 0 widgets" do
# #thing is available here
#thing.should have(0).widgets
end
it "can get accept new widgets" do
#thing.widgets << Object.new
end
it "does not share state across examples" do
#thing.should have(0).widgets
end
end
end
You can find more details at:
https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-core/v/2-2/docs/hooks/before-and-after-hooks#define-before(:each)-block
Related
When one of my it blocks fails, I want to run a cleanup step. When all of the it blocks succeed I don't want to run the cleanup step.
RSpec.describe 'my describe' do
it 'first it' do
logic_that_might_fail
end
it 'second it' do
logic_that_might_fail
end
after(:all) do
cleanup_logic if ONE_OF_THE_ITS_FAILED
end
end
How do I implement ONE_OF_THE_ITS_FAILED?
Not sure if RSpec provides something out of the box, but this would work:
RSpec.describe 'my describe' do
before(:all) do
#exceptions = []
end
after(:each) do |example|
#exceptions << example.exception
end
after(:all) do |a|
cleanup_logic if #exceptions.any?
end
# ...
end
I digged a little into the RSpec Code and found a way to monkey patch the RSpec Reporter class. Put this into your spec_helper.rb:
class RSpecHook
class << self
attr_accessor :hooked
end
def example_failed(example)
# Code goes here
end
end
module FailureDetection
def register_listener(listener, *notifications)
super
return if ::RSpecHook.hooked
#listeners[:example_failed] << ::RSpecHook.new
::RSpecHook.hooked = true
end
end
RSpec::Core::Reporter.prepend FailureDetection
Of course it gets a little more complex if you wish to execute different callbacks depending on the spec you're running at the moment.
Anyway, this way you do not have to mess up your testing code with exceptions or counters to detect failures.
My weakest point when it comes to coding, is using TDD & BDD methods - I tend to just write code.. but it is something that I am trying to work on.
Could anyone point out the best way to go about the following problem:
Class1:
module TempMod
class MyClass
def initalize(config)
#config = config
end
def process(xml)
if react_upon? xml.something
puts 'yeah'
else
puts 'nah'
end
end
def react_upon?(xml_code)
#code here
end
end
end
So lets say I wanted to test this class, or build it from a TDD point of view so I write my tests:
describe TempMod::MyClass do
let(:config) {double}
let(:myclass) {TempMod::MyClass.new config}
context 'Given that the xml is something we react upon' do
it 'should check that it is valid' do
myclass.process '<some><xml>here</xml></some>'
end
it 'should output yea'
end
end
How do I test that it is calling the react_upon? method. Do I even want to see it is calling it?
Is the proper way to test it, to test all the functions like the react_upon? itself independently of the other functions?
This is properly the main thing that is most confusing me with this sort of testing. Am I testing the whole class, or just individually testing the functions, and not their interactions with the other functions in that class?
Also I realize the the react_upon? might not adhere to the Single responsibility principle and I would probably move that out to its own module/class which I could test using a stub.
If anyone can shed some light on this for me that would be awesome.
edit:
describe TempMod::MyClass do
let (:valid_planning_status_xml) {
'<StatusUpdate> <TitleId>2329</TitleId> <FromStatus>Proposed</FromStatus> <ToStatus>Confirmed</ToStatus> </StatusUpdate>'
}
let(:config) { double }
let(:status_resolver) { double }
subject(:message_processor) { TempMod::MyClass.new config, status_resolver }
context 'Given that the message XML is valid' do
it 'should check the context of the message' do
expect(message_processor.process valid_planning_status_xml).to call :check_me
end
context 'Given that the message is for a planning event update' do
it 'should call something' do
pending
end
end
context 'Given that the message is for a recording job update' do
end
context 'Given that the message is for a video title update' do
end
end
end
Your question confused me a bit is this what you are asking
module TempMod
class MyClass
def initalize(config)
#config = config
end
def process(xml)
react_upon?(xml.something) ? 'yeah' : 'nah'
end
def react_upon?(xml_code)
#code here
end
end
end
Then test like
describe TempMod::MyClass do
let(:config) {double}
let(:myclass) {TempMod::MyClass.new config}
context 'Given that the xml is something we react upon' do
it "should respond to react_upon?" do
expect(myclass).to respond_to(:react_upon?)
end
it "should react_upon? valid xml" do
expect(myclass.react_upon?(YOUR VALID REACTION GOES HERE)).to be_true
end
it "should not react_upon? invalid xml" do
expect(myclass.react_upon?(YOUR INVALID REACTION GOES HERE)).to be_false
end
it "should say 'yeah' if it is valid" do
expect(myclass.process('<some><xml>here</xml></some>')).to eq('yeah')
end
it "should say 'nah' if it is invalid" do
expect(myclass.process('<some><xml>here</some>')).to eq('nah')
end
it 'should check the context of the message' do
expect(myclass).to receive(:react_upon?).with('<some><xml>here</xml></some>')
myclass.process('<some><xml>here</xml></some>')
end
end
end
Right now your tests have no expectations so I added one that expects myclass to respiond_to the react_upon? method and another that expects myclass.process(xml) to respond with a String that equals yeah.
I often build little single-purpose Ruby scripts like this:
#!/usr/bin/env ruby
class Widget
def end_data
DATA.read
end
def render_data source_data
source_data.upcase
end
end
w = Widget.new
puts w.render_data(w.end_data)
__END__
data set to work on.
I'd like to include RSpec tests directly inside the file while I'm working on it. Something like this (which doesn't work but illustrates what I'm trying to do):
#!/usr/bin/env ruby
class Widget
def end_data
DATA.read
end
def render_data source_data
source_data.upcase
end
def self_test
# This doesn't work but shows what I'm trying to
# accomplish. The goal is to have RSpec run these type
# of test when self_test is called.
describe "Widget" do
it "should render data properly" do
#w = Widget.new
expect(#w.render_data('test string')).to eq 'TEST STRING'
end
end
end
end
w = Widget.new
w.self_test
__END__
data set to work on.
I understand this is not the normal way to work with RSpec and isn't appropriate in most cases. That said, there are times when it would be nice. So, I'd like to know, is it possible?
There are two things. First off rspec by default won't pollute the global namespace with methods like describe and so on. The second thing is that you need to tell rspec to run the specs after they've been declared.
If you change your self_test method to be
RSpec.describe "Widget" do
it "should render data properly" do
#w = Widget.new
expect(#w.render_data('test string')).to eq 'TEST STRING'
end
end
RSpec::Core::Runner.invoke
(having of course done require 'rspec' then that will run your specs).
The invoke methods exits the process after running the specs. If you don't want to do that, or need more control over where output goes etc. you might want to drop down to the run method which allows you to control these things.
I've got an interesting conundrum. I'm in the midst of developing a library to parse PSDs in Ruby. Also, a buddy is simultaneously working on a library to parse PSDs in JavaScript. We would like to share the same unit tests via a git submodule.
We've decided to use a simple JSON DSL to define each test. A single test might look like:
{
"_name": "Layer should render out",
"_file": "test/fixtures/layer_out.psd",
"_exports_to": "test/controls/layer_out_control.png"
}
So, now it's up to us to build the appropriate test harnesses to translate the JSON into the appropriate native unit tests. I've been using MiniTest to get myself up to speed, but I'm running into a few walls.
Here's what I've got so far. The test harness is named TargetPractice for the time being:
# run_target_practice.rb
require 'target_practice'
TargetPractice.new(:test) do |test|
test.pattern = "test/**/*.json"
end
and
# psd_test.rb
class PSDTest < MiniTest::Unit::TestCase
attr_accessor :data
def tests_against_data
# do some assertions
end
end
and
# target_practice.rb
class TargetPractice
attr_accessor :libs, :pattern
def initialize(sym)
#libs = []
#pattern = ""
yield self
run_tests
end
def run_tests
FileList[#pattern].to_a.each do |file|
test_data = JSON.parse(File.open(file).read)
test = PSDTest.new(test_data["_name"]) do |t|
t.data = test_data
end
end
end
end
Unfortunately, I'm having trouble getting a yield in the initialize to stick in my PSDTest class. Also, it appears that a test will run immediately on initialization.
I would like to dynamically create a few MiniTest::Unit::TestCase objects, set their appropriate data properties and then run the tests. Any pointers are appreciated!
I think you are overcomplicating things a bit here. What you need is a parameterized test, which is pretty trivial to implement using mintest/spec:
describe "PSD converter" do
def self.tests(pattern = 'test/**/*.json')
FileList[pattern].map{|file| JSON.parse(File.read(file))}
end
tests.each do |test|
it "satisfies test: " + test["_name"] do
# some assertions using test["_file"] and test["_exports_to"]
end
end
end
I'm trying to define a few let's and before hooks that will run globally for all my specs by including them in a separate file using the Rspec configuration block.
I tried something like:
module Helpers
def self.included(base)
base.let(:x){ "x" }
base.before(:all){ puts "x: #{x}" }
end
end
Rspec.configure{|c| c.include Helpers }
but this doesn't work as expected. The before(:all) doesn't just run before each main example group, but each nested one as well.
Then I found out about shared_context and it appears to be exactly what I want.
My open problem however is that I can't figure out how to share a context amongst ALL of my specs. The docs only reference include_context within a specific spec.
Can anyone tell me how I can achieve this behavior in a global manner? I'm aware that I can define global before hooks in my spec_helper but I can't seem to use let. I'd like a single place that I can define both of these things and not pollute my spec helper, but just include it instead.
I tried to reproduce your error, but failed.
# spec_helper.rb
require 'support/global_helpers'
RSpec.configure do |config|
config.include MyApp::GlobalHelpers
end
# support/global_helpers.rb
module MyApp
module GlobalHelpers
def self.included(base)
base.let(:beer) { :good }
base.before(:all) { #bottles = 10 }
end
end
end
# beer_spec.rb
require 'spec_helper'
describe "Brewery" do
it "makes good stuff" do
beer.should be :good
end
it "makes not too much bottles" do
#bottles.should == 10
end
context "when tasting beer" do
before(:all) do
#bottles -= 1
end
it "still produces good stuff" do
beer.should be :good
end
it "spends some beer on degusting" do
#bottles.should == 9
end
end
end
https://gist.github.com/2283634
When I wrote something like base.before(:all) { p 'global before'; #bottles = 10 }, I got exactly one line in spec output.
Notice that I didn't try to modify instance variables inside an example, because it wouldn't work anyway (well, actually you can modify instance variables, if it's a hash or array). Moreover, even if you change before(:all) in nested example group to before(:each), there will be still 9 bottles in each example.